Nationalism and Religion in Iran
Iran holds important lessons for the Middle East, for the Islamic
World, and for the future of Nationalism. The Islamic Republic of
Iran emerged from the 1979 Iranian Revolution, which Eric
Hobsbawm memorably described as “the first major … social
upheaval rejecting both the traditions of 1789 and 1917.” The
extraordinary political role of Shi’a clerics in Iranian government
and electoral policy make the Islamic Republic offer a unique
laboratory for examining the confrontation between religious and
national loyalties. The dramatic aftermath of the 2010 elections
show the pressing relevance of the issues that the Iranian system
of government poses.
The conference will be held on Saturday 17 March 2012 at the
Victoria University’s Kelburn Campus, room OK 406, in
Wellington, New Zealand. This free event is open to the public.
Conference Schedule
10:00
Welcome from prof. Sekhar Bandyopadhyay
10:15
The Islamic Republic and Nationalism
“Iran and Religious Nationalism.”
Rob Imre – University of Newcastle (NSW)
“Political Legitimacy in Iran: Nationalism & the Islamic Republic.”
Alexander Maxwell – Victoria University
11:15
Coffee break
11:30
Domestic Tensions in the Islamic Republic
“Ahwaz Nationalism in a Persian State, 1925-2010.”
Ali Mazraeh – Victoria University
“Iran’s Right-Wing Political Faction in the 2009 Election.”
Negar Partow – Victoria University, Wellington
12:30
Lunch break
1:30
The Iranian Republic in a Global Context
“Activism, Civil Society & Islam: Feminist Movements in Iran.”
Hawzhin Azeez – University of Newcastle (NSW)
“Iranian Nationalism in the Middle East.”
Zahra Abotorabi Ardestani – Aligarh Muslim University, India
6:00
Conference dinner (venue to be announced).
Conference Abstracts
“Iranian nationalism in the Middle East”
Zahra Abotorabi– Aligarh Muslim University, India
What is nationalism? What characterizes Iranian nationalism? How has
nationalism been demonstrated in Iran’s history? Nationalism can be seen
in very different ways. Iran holds a unique place in the study of the modern
Middle East: it is a non-Arab country, but deeply involved in the heart of
the Arab world; Iranian nationalism has been around since the 1870’s. The
oil nationalization of 1951, the Iran-Iraq war of 1980’s, and finally, the
nuclear enrichment program and president Ahmadinejad signify
nationalism in present day Iran.
“Feminist Activism, Civil Society & Islam: Feminist Movements in Iran”
Hawzhin Azeez – University of Newcastle (NSW)
Feminist activism within civil society holds great interest to theorists of
development studies. Increasingly in Third World countries civil society is
a realm of resistance, a source of ‘society against the state’, peace-building
as well as redefining gender relations. Third World Feminists have utilized
civil society as an avenue for ‘new possibilities for political emancipation’
and ultimately as a means of democratic transition. Islamic feminists have
likewise developed distinct and culture specific women’s civil movements.
The civil society revolution in Iran has birthed three distinct feminist
schools: Islamic feminists, Muslim feminists, and secular feminists writing
in the diaspora constitute as the foremost emerging discourses. These
feminists propose different and often conflicting visions of ideal gender
relations, contesting the regimes ideological foundations. Analysis of the
three feminists’ perspectives indicates the evolving nature of nationalist
sentiments as well as the role of religion within Iran. While these feminists
do not deny Islam as the state religion they do provide diverse normative
state-society and gender narratives. As a result they propose different
roles- more conservative or moderate- for religion within the Republic
which confronts the states religious-centered political vision.
“Political Legitimacy in Iran: Nationalism and the Islamic Republic”
Alexander Maxwell – Victoria University
In recent decades, political legitimacy increasingly rests on nationalist
rhetoric and rituals: the “will of the people,” perhaps disregarded in
undemocratic practice, has become ubiquitous as an item of demotic
political rhetoric. The Islamic Republic of Iran nevertheless promotes an
interesting hybrid case: regular parliamentary elections under the
supervision of a clerical elite who derive their authority from supernatural
sources. The global spread of demotic ideas, however, makes undemocratic
practice increasingly difficult to sustain. The failed Green Revolution of
2010 suggests that the government of Iran maintains power only through
violence, and is thus unstable. This paper explores the tension between the
Iranian government and segments of Iranian society seeking to end the role
of Iran’s Shi’a elite, and speculates about other possible sources of political
legitimacy should the Islamic Republic collapse.
“Ahwaz Nationalism in a Persian State, 1925-2010”
Ali Mazraeh - Victoria University, Wellington
What now is called Iran is in fact a land of several nations with their own
traditions, languages, art, and religion. All claim to have shaped Iran’s
history. In 1925, however, Reza Shah took over Iran via British support,
establishing the Pahlavi Dynasty. Reza Shah and his foreign allies sought a
united and strongly integrated Iran, and thus asserted Persian dominance
over all previously semi-autonomous regions throughout Iran. Among the
defeated regions was Al-Ahwaz, which at that time was ruled by Sheikh
Khaza’al as Arabistan “the land of Arabs.” Yet Al-Ahwaz, with its strategic
location, adjacent to Arab neighbors, sustained its independence against
the Iranian central governments, more effectively, than other Iranian
nations. This paper summarizes Al-Ahwaz history, covering Reza Shah’s
occupation in 1925. It describes the Ahwazi national movement and its
suppression from consecutive Persian-ruled governments. The paper also
addresses how Iranian ethnicities may influence the Iranian political
landscape in the future; and how the Awhazi question may affect the
strategic balance in the Gulf geopolitics.
“Iran and Religious Nationalism”
Rob Imre – University of Newcastle (NSW)
One of the main problems with Iran in the contemporary world is the
assumption that Iran is involved in a particular kind of power projection in
an attempt to become a regional hegemon. This may well be the case, and
this regional hegemonic activity is the current galvanizing force in the
country with all parties acceding to the ‘right’ of the modern Iranian
nation-state to assert its territoriality over areas occupied by coreligionists. However, as is the case with several other modern nationstates, it is difficult to construct such an argument based on religious
nationalism. The destruction of Pakistan in the post-partition period in
general is an example of the dangers faced by political elites seeking to
maintain control over an area in which ethnic allegiances and/or ‘modern
policy’ concerns may well override co-religious allegiances. Political elites
that do not demonstrate the capacity for these modern policy concerns are
consistently faced with stresses that include de-legitimation as well as
stronger problems with a centrifugal pull on the maintenance of the
integrity of the nation-state.
“Iran’s Right-Wing Political Faction in the 2009 Presidential Election”
Negar Partow – Victoria University, Wellington
In the Islamic Republic of Iran religious language is the vessel that contains
the codes of Iranian politics, provides a platform for identifying various
factions, and delineates their views on national and Islamic identities of the
state. The 2009 presidential election and the public uprising against its
controversial results fragmented factional politics in Iran and elicited new
debates over the identity and goals of the state within the conservative
camp. This article examines the religious language of Ahmadinejad and
Khamenei in order to explain this fragmentation and the new tensions that
have emerged in their post-election political statements. It argues that
using religious symbols as the source of legitimacy creates a barrier for
unity amongst the conservative camp on three levels. First, it produces an
uncompromising political situation and significantly reduces the possibility
of negotiation between the right wing political parties. Second, it sends
paradoxical messages to the conservative groups in the society and
instigates resentment amongst their followers. Third, it discusses all
political tensions within the camp to debates over the legitimacy of the
jurisprudential leadership and ultimately de-legitimizes the position. At the
heart of these debates, lies a growing divergence amongst the
conservatives over the national and religious identities of the state.
Contact Information
Zahra Abotorabi
Hawzhin Azeez
Robert Imre
Alexander Maxwell
Ali Mazraeh
Negar Partow
zahra.abotorabi(at)gmail.com
hawzhin.azeez(at)uon.edu.au
Robert.Imre(at)newcastle.edu.au
alexander.maxwell(at)vuw.ac.nz
am_awz(at)yahoo.co.nz
negarpartow(at)gmail.com
Organized by the Antipodean East European Study Group